Interesting short article about the state of play as seen by Amnesty.

I’m sure I remember reading something (or maybe saw it on TV) around the late 90’s which was talking about the end of the cold war and how it was ushering in a period which was relatively unknown in the history of Britain. I can’t remember it exactly, but the basic gist was that the general populace (of this country) had been experiencing, for pretty much the first time, a period where they were not at serious physical threat from war (since the end of WWII I think they said).

Obviously this wasn’t a declaration that all was well in the world, but just that the current generation of young people were not likely to be conscripted to die for their nation, and neither was there a large threat that they would be killed by an agressive foreign entity.

I’m trying to tread carefully here coz I’m not sure of the timing and I’m aware that obviously the threat of terrorism (eg. from the IRA) had not dissappeared. Nor do I want to dismiss the first Gulf War, or dissintergration of Yugoslavia, but I think the point was that these things didn’t have the same effect on the conciousness of ordinary folk as did the apocalyptic propaganda of the cold war. I think the point was fear, and the idea of living without it.

Reading the Amnesty article I was thinking about the change in climate that has happened since Sept 11. Fear is the sole purpose of terrorism and any war against it should try to stop people being scared. Why is it then that when you think about what the strongest countries in the world are doing right now, and about what the future they’re creating is going to hold, why is it that the only logical response is fear?